Self-regulation and academic achievement in the transition to school

11 SELF-REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN THE TRANSITION TO SCHOOL FREDERICK J. MORRISON, CLAIRE CAMERON PONITZ, AND MEGAN M. McCLELLAND

Understanding of children's cognitive and social development has advanced significantly over the past 3 decades. Particularly with regard to those skills critical for academic success, research has revealed that multiple interacting factors in the child, home, school, and larger sociocultural context all contribute to children's literacy, numeracy, language, and social skills, starting early in life and continuing throughout the school years (Morrison, Bachman, & Connor, 2005). One factor, self-regulation, has surfaced recently as a crucial skill that uniquely predicts children's early school success. Poor self-regulation has been linked to high rates of expulsion, most dramatically in preschool classrooms (Gilliam & Shahar, 2006). Self-regulation refers to a complex of acquired, intentional skills involved in controlling, directing, and planning one's cognitions, emotions, and behaviot (Schunk & Zimmerman, 1997). In investigations beyond the classFunding for this chapter was supported by National Institute of Child and Human Development Grant R01 HD27176 and National Science Foundation Grant 0111754. Additional funding was provided by U.S. Department of Education, Institute for Education Sciences Grant R305B06(X)09.

203

room, scientists from a broad range of perspectives have reached consensus on the centrality of successful self-regulation as a marker of adaptive development. Findings have demonstrated, at an emerging level of specificity, how biological and neurological processes interact with psychological and experiential factors to determine how children regulate themselves in a given setting. Biological factors such as temperament, that is, an individual's predisposed reactivity and regulation of reactions to stimuli, underpin these additive and interactive processes. Self-regulation also develops through early experiences and social interactions, in which caregivers and other significant individuals structure and shape children's trajectories (Grolnick & Farkas, 2002; Kopp, 1982). In this chapter, we examine self-regulation and its role in academic development, focusing on the transition to formal schooling. We posit that adaptive development in the school context depends on children's ability to manage their reactions and specifically their task-related behaviors. Moreover, successfully self-regulating depends on environmental influences and interactions with others as well as child factors and predispositions. We focus on the construct of behavioral self-regulation, which is closely aligned with executive function and which we define as the execution and manifestation of cognitive processes in overt behaviot. Remembering and using information, attending to and understanding what others are saying, directing motor actions, and persisting toward goals are all indicators of adaptive behavioral regulation (McClelland, Cameron, Wanless, & Murray, 2007). Our goals in the chapter are to examine behavioral regulation in the context of early childhood and the transition to school, elucidating how children's skills contribute to achievement. First, we demonstrate links between behavioral regulation and academic achievement prior to formal schooling and throughout elementary school; second, we summarize evidence on the relations between behavioral regulation and emotion regulation; thitd, we discuss individual differences and proximal influences on regulatory skill growth; fourth, we explore risk factors in the school setting important for the development of behavioral regulation. We end the chapter with a discussion of practical implications and suggestions for future research.

BEHAVIORAL REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT Multiple underlying cognitive skills are involved in overt behavioral regulation. This complex of cognitive processes involves processing and manipulating stimuli (working memory); inhibiting automatic reactions to stimuli while initiating unnatural yet adaptive reactions (inhibitory control); and managing one's attention to appropriate stimuli, including resisting distraction and shifting tasks when necessary (attentional or cognitive flexibility). 204

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND

Evidence has linked these individual cognitive components to achievement prior to formal schooling (Blair, 2002; Blair & Razza, 2007; McClelland, Cameron, Connor, et al., 2007) and throughout elementary school (Alexander, Entwisle, & Dauber, 1993; McClelland, Morrison, & Holmes, 2000; McClelland, Acock, & Morrison, 2006). For example, the National Institute for Child Health and Human Development Early Child Care Research Network (2003) found that better attention on a tedious computer task predicted better reading and math achievement in 54-month-old children. In another study, kindergarteners with better attention scored significantly higher than those with poorer attention skills on achievement tests (Howse, Lange, Farran, & Boyles, 2003). A third study of working memoty showed that children who could keep better track of the number of dots on multiple cards had higher mathematics achievement. Finally, Blair and Razza (2007) found that preschool levels of inhibitory control predicted kindergarten reading and mathematics achievement. Such studies have demonstrated that performing well on tasks that require focused, vigilant attention, remembering multiple pieces of information, and inhibiting automatic actions to activate nonautomatic responses predicts correspondingly higher levels of eatly achievement. These individual cognitive components together form a critical aspect of school readiness. The construct of executive function (EF), widely used in the neuropsychological and cognitive literatures, refers to these multiple components operating together (Miyake, Friedman, Emerson, Witzki, & Howerter, 2000; Zelazo, Muller, Frye, & Marcovitch, 2003). The quintessential measure of EF is the Dimensional Change Card Sort (DCCS) task, in which children must first sort cards with pictures of red and blue trucks and boats by color and then switch and sort by shape (Muller, Dick, Gela, Overton, & Zelazo, 2006). Another popular EF measure is the Tower of London or Tower of Hanoi, in which children are presented with rings of varying size on a three-pegged board; they must move the rings from one peg to another and match a particular ring sequence using as few moves as possible (Bull, Espy, & Senn, 2004). These tasks require remembering rules or holding ring/peg locations in mind, inhibiting the tendency to use the old rule or move a peg incorrectly, and attending to the current rule or ring sequence. Kindergarten teachers agree that similar skills—such as following directions, paying attention, and working independently—although critical for school success, are deficient in many children. The studies by McClelland et al. (2000) and Rimm-Kaufman et al. (2000) have supported such obsetvations and have highlighted a practical need to bridge the gap between findings from the laboratory and from the classroom to understand how behaviotal regulation develops over the school transition. More recently, researchers have been developing structured observational measures that can be used in school settings over the transition years but do not require use of computers or specialized equipment (Griffin, 2008). The Head-to-Toes Task (HTT) is SELF-REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

205

one such measure, which activates multiple cognitive skills (Ponitz et al., 2008). The task requires children to remember and respond to two conflicting spoken commands with gross motor actions (i.e., children are instructed to touch their toes when the examiner tells them to touch their head, and vice versa). Results indicate that higher prekindergarten behavioral regulation scores in the fall significantly predict stronger achievement levels in the spring. More strikingly, greater behavioral regulation gains over the prekindergarten year predict greater gains in early mathematics, literacy, and vocabulary skills after controlling for fall achievement levels (McClelland, Cameron, Connor, et al., 2007). A follow-up study in kindergarten used a more complex version of the HTT, called Head-Toes-Knees-Shoulders (HTKS). This version builds on the HTT by requiring children to remember and respond to four (vs. two) different behavioral commands in conflict with the correct response (Ponitz, McClelland, Matthews, & Morrison, 2009). Findings revealed that stronger levels of behavioral regulation in the fall predict higher fall and spring levels of mathematics, literacy, and vocabulary skills, as well as teacher-rated classroom behavioral regulation. Behavioral regulation gains also predicted mathematics gains (controlling for fall mathematics levels). Multiple explanations may be offered for the consistent association between behavioral regulation tasks and academic success. First, they require EF, which is a strong predictor of cognitive ability and academic performance (Mazzocco & Kover, 2007; Miyake et al., 2000). Second, they require responses similar to behaviors required in classrooms: For example, the inhibition required in HTT generically taps processes similar to remembering to raise one's hand before speaking in class. Third, instructions and commands are delivered in the school setting, by an adult in authority. The first explanation has been well established in the literature, whereas the second and third have received less attention. Studies that examine differences in trial delivery (e.g., an examiner taps a pencil, states a command, or provides a laptop or other object to deliver the trial stimulus) and task response modality (e.g., fine motor, gross motor, oral responses) would further illuminate the measures that most closely map onto school-related outcomes (Diamond, 2000). Undoubtedly, EF and behavioral regulation overlap—indeed, it is fair to ask whether both terms are necessary. To indicate the manifestation of multiple cognitive processes in overt behavior, we use the higher order term behavioral regulation instead of executive function (McClelland, Cameron, Wanless, & Murray, 2007). In the literature, behavioral regulation has been typically situated within naturalistic, nonlaboratory contexts such as the classroom, which may present unique regulatory challenges (Calkins, 2007; Howse, Calkins, Anastopoulos, Keane, & Shelton, 2003). For example, in the classroom, children need to maintain attention on one project and remember to clean up before moving to free choice activity. A child might score well on 206

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND

the DCCS when it is administeted in an individualized setting, but the same child may have difficulty completing the classroom project and cleaning up. In the rare studies using traditional EF measures along with behavioral regulation assessments, correlations among EF measures and behavioral outcomes that have been documented are modest (Blair, 2003; Lan & Morrison, 2008). For example, Blair (2003) found that teacher ratings of preschoolers' on-task behavior correlated r = .24 (ns) with EF performance on the peg-tapping and day/night tasks. Providing further impetus to understand the development and effective measurement of behavioral regulation, or "executive function in context," is mounting evidence establishing that behavioral regulation contributes significant, unique variance to children's academic achievement and growth trajectories across preschool years, elementary school, middle school, and even high school. In one study that followed children to middle school, kindergarten behavioral regulation (as part of a broader learning-related skills construct measured by teacher report) predicted reading and math achievement between kindergarten and sixth grade and growth in literacy and math from kindergarten to second grade (McClelland et al., 2006). Another inquiry spanning early childhood to young adulthood showed that kindergarteners with poor behavioral regulation (teachet-rated attention problems and hyperactivity) were less likely to graduate from high school than their well-regulated peers (Vitaro, Brendgen, Larose, &.Trembaly, 2005).

THE INTERSECTION OF EMOTION AND BEHAVIORAL REGULATION Children's self-regulation extends to managing their emotions as well as their actions (Calkins, 2007; Eisenberg & Spinrad, 2004). We adopt Eisenberg and Spinrad's definition of emotion regulation as the deliberate modification and modulation of emotional teactions. Considerable evidence links children's effective management of their emotions to positive behavioral and academic outcomes (Eisenberg, Smith, Sadovsky, & Spinrad, 2004; Graziano, Reavis, Keane, & Calkins, 2006; Howse, Lange, et al., 2003). In contrast, children who cannot control their emotions are more likely to act out, behave aggressively, and oppose the perspectives and requests of others (Graziano et al., 2006; Raver, 2004). Theoretical efforts (e.g., Blair, 2002) have sought to identify conceptual and empirical relations between emotional and behavioral regulation (and its underlying executive processes). For example, Blair has noted that stronger negative emotional reactions (e.g., anger, anxiety) may impede children's ability to regulate their behavior in school settings, where they need to deploy attention and persist in their work. Calkins (2007) concurred that variability in emotion regulation is related to, and may challenge or SELF-REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

207

enhance, children's ability to manage their task-related behavior. For example, children who are easily angered will have more difficulty concentrating on schoolwork than those who can effectively modulate their emotional reactions. An emerging theme from this and other work is that strong behavioral regulation, particularly attentional flexibility, may ameliorate the otherwise negative effects of poor emotion regulation. Thus, the link between emotion regulation and other developmental outcomes depends on children's choices about where to direct their attention and overt behavior (Henderson & Fox, 1998; Rothbart, Posner, & Kieras, 2006). For example, one study of toddlers found that those with strong negative emotionality actually achieved greater readiness for school (measured by knowledge related to colors, letters, counting, shapes, and conceptual comparisons) but only when the children had strong attention skills (Belsky, Friedman, & Hsieh, 2001). Another recent study revealed that teacher ratings of children's emotional regulation in kindergarten positively predicted first-grade teachers' ratings of attention, which then predicted first-grade achievement (Trentacosta & Izard, 2007). These findings indicate that extreme emotional lability—although previously considered a risk factor—need not be detrimental if children handle their extreme reactions in an adaptive way, such as directing their attention to something else. Thus, compared with emotional regulation, behavioral regulation may be the operable determinant of adjustment and academic success. Howse, Calkins, et al. (2003) found that preschool behavioral regulation mediated the contribution of emotion regulation on kindergarten mathematics and literacy achievement. Together, these findings provide empirical support for a hierarchical conceptualization of self-regulation, whereby children who react strongly emotionally, but who can successfully control their attention and behavior, fare better than children with little capacity to regulate their behavior.

SOURCES OF INFLUENCE In this section, we distinguish among child factors (i.e., those originating and measured within the child) and external factors (i.e., those originating and measured in the child's environment). Throughout, we note how individual factors interrelate with environmental influences in their associations with self-regulation. We consider biological findings first, then parenting, and then move to a discussion ofthe emerging evidence on the role of schooling in the development of self-regulation. Child and Family Factors Neurological and biological influences, includng temperament, have been implicated as child-related influences, and parent-child attachment 208

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND

and parenting styles have emerged as family sources of growth on selfregulation. Brain and Biological Devebpment Early work seemed to suggest that higher order skills underlying executive function did not really emerge until at least preadolescence (Golden, 1984). At present, it is clear that executive skills emerge early in life and grow steadily through at least early adolescence, with this position corroborated by evidence from neurological research (Diamond, 2000). Three major cycles paralleling data on cortical development have been identified: 18 months to 5 yeats, 5 to 10 years, and 10 to 14 years, with the cycle from late preschool through elementary school being perhaps the most dynamic. During early childhood, the parts of the brain that help children control, direct, and plan their actions undergo significant maturation, including myelination and pruning. In addition, research on brain-behavior relations has revealed that site-specific cortex activation co-occurs with particular behavioral responses (Blair, 2002; Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). For example, deliberate cognitive processing operates through dorsolateral prefrontal pathways, whereas spontaneous responses to emotionally relevant stimuli operate through ventromedial pathways (Zelazo, Muller, & Goswami, 2002). These processes together contribute to a child's regulatory functioning (Rothbart et al., 2006). In a recent review of findings from brain research, Lewis and Todd (2007) suggested that optimal regulation means the coordination of activation in diffetent ateas ofthe brain. Studies have indicated that after processing emotional stimuli, our brains then engage areas associated with cognitive and attentional tasks (e.g., the anterior cingulate cortex) to manage emotional reaction. For example, heightened activity of the amygdala —a site commonly linked to the processing of emotional information—is followed by prefrontal cortex activity to regulate the amygdala. Thus, in general, recent trends have been to move away from pitting emotion regulation against cognitive regulatory skills (Zelazo et al., 2002), toward a conceptualization of these two sets of processes as interactive and reciprocally regulating. This argument parallels our claim that adaptive behavior in school depends not just on children's overall emotional reactivity but also on their managing extreme reactions through directing their attention and ultimate behavior. The theme of achieving an optimal balance of reactions and regulation of those reactions is further reflected in research on temperament, another child factor implicated in self-regulation. Temperament How a child reacts and regulates his or her reactions has biological origins in a construct known as temperament, which presages later personality tendencies (Kochanska, Murray, & Harlan, 2000). In general, the term SELF-REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

209

temperament broadly refers to levels of reactivity and the regulation of that reactivity in eatly development. One factor, effortful control, contributes to the degree to which children can manage and direct their own actions in cognitive, social, emotional, and behavioral domains (e.g., Rothbart & Rueda, 2005). For example, effortful control helps children inhibit a behavior (e.g., grabbing for a cookie) and control their emotional reactivity (e.g., stop from having a tantrum). Effortful control also shapes how children relate to othets, including conscience development (e.g., Kochanska, Murray, & Harlan, 2000) and social outcomes (e.g., Eisenberg et al., 2004; Eisenberg et al., 2005). As shown in brain research with adults, the anterior attentional systems underlie children's effortful control, which predicts both emotional and behavioral regulation (Rothbart et al., 2006; Rueda, Posner, & Rothbart, 2005). Rothbart et al. have placed particular emphasis on the role of executive attention in effortful control, noting how some infants are more likely to selectively orient their attention as a means of soothing their disttess. For example, at seeing a colorful, multiarmed mobile, one child might become distressed, communicating this by crying, fussing, and kicking. However, the child might then look into his mother's face and slowly calm down. More frequent use of early attentional strategies, such as directing attention away from the stressful stimulus, predicts later levels of strong effortful control. To describe how early attentional strategies and later behavioral outcomes interrelate, Calkins (2007) proposed a hierarchical, interactive model of selfregulation in which physiological, attentional, and emotional regulation in the first 3 years of life form a network of reactive and regulatory tendencies, within which intentional regulatory functions emerge as children enter the early school years. Parent-Child Attachment Regulation of distress, attention, and behavior does not emerge in isolation; caregivers are immensely important in helping children learn to regulate themselves. Caregivers—most often parents—are infants' first indicators about the world. Through their actions, reactions, and interactions, parents help children learn whether the world is generally a safe, consistent place that can be reliably affected by signaling for help, distress, or happiness, or a scary, unpredictable place in which one's actions go unnoticed. Parents who match their infant's signals, with appropriate levels of help and soothing when the infant is distressed or with positive affect when the infant is happy, are more likely to develop a secure attachment with their child (De Wolff & van Ijzendoom, 1997). A secure parent-child attachment is thus seen as enabling children to express emotion appropriately and develop strong behavioral regulation (Waters, Weinfield, & Hamilton, 2000). Studies of attachment have also highlighted the importance of the child's reactivity and responsiveness in shaping caregiver responses (Calkins, 2004). For ex210

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND

ample, infants with an easy temperament may encourage more parental interaction than infants who are reactive and negative (i.e., those with a difficult or slow-to-warm-up temperament). Despite these themes, connections among parenting, attachment, and the development of self-regulation are not consistent and require more research using a transactional lens. Parenting Styles As infants become toddlers with a will of their own, parenting behaviors to discipline or control theit child's misbehavior add to factors contributing to the development of self-regulation. Studies show that authoritative parenting styles characterized by maintaining consistency, reasoning with the child about discipline decisions, and supporting the child's autonomy are linked with stronger behavioral regulation (Tudge, Odero, Hogan, & Etz, 2003). In one study, mothers who were physically controlling with their 4year-olds during a regulation cleanup task had children who were more likely to cheat on a game at 56 months (Kochanska & Knaack, 2003). Furthetmore, maternal power assertion predicted cheating even after the child's own behavior during the cleanup tasks (e.g., defiance) was controlled. Thus, parents may be both mediators and moderators ofthe relation between children's experiences and their developing behavioral regulation. School Factors So far, we have identified the importance of behavioral regulation for academic achievement, described how being able to direct attention is important for regulating emotional responses and subsequent behavior, and shown the role of biological and parenting behaviors in whether children appropriate regulatory strategies. The next section focuses more squarely on behavioral regulation situated within early school settings. Child Factors Interacting With Early School Experiences Similar to themes from parent-child research, children's behavioral regulation in school depends on multiple factors, including children's prior characteristics and experiences as well as characteristics of the classroom. For example, in one study, kindergarteners with poor parent-rated inhibitory control were rated by their teachers as having more difficulty in adjusting to the classroom. Furthermore, those with low inhibitory control, whose parents also reported lax parenting behaviors (e.g., letting their kindergartener decide what to eat and when to go to bed), had the most difficulty in adjusting. Lax parenting had no relation with adjustment for children with strong inhibitory control (Nathanson, Rimm-Kaufman, & Brock, in press). Another study used observational measures to classify participants as socially bold or wary; bold infants showed little distress at the stranger's appearance, and wary children tended to cry or to look worriedly at their mothSELF-REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

211

ers (Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2002). In classrooms with sensitive teachers, the children classified as bold at 15 months exhibited stronger behavioral regulation, whereas such children were more often off-task and less self-reliant in classrooms with less sensitive teachers. In another study, children who were rated by their teachers as impulsive but engaged in more complex kinds of play had stronger behavioral regulation, measured by persistence during cleanup, 6 months later, compared with impulsive children engaging in less complex play. No such relation was found for children rated low on impulsivity (Elias & Berk, 2002). All of the studies cited here have highlighted the role of child factors like temperament in school functioning and demonstrate how they interact with the environmental context. Together, they have suggested that caregivers, including preschool providers, contribute to children's developing behavioral regulation directly and through complex, yet systematic, interactions with child factors. In general, the literature has suggested that providing a secure base, communicating consistent expectations for behavior, and helping children develop their own regulatory strategies without being didactic or directive are associated with development of successful selfregulation. This conclusion dovetails nicely with theoretical work on the development of self-regulation, emphasizing the transition from "other" regulation by adults to eventually being able to control one's own actions and reactions (Grolnick &. Farkas, 2002; Kopp, 1982). However, specific experiences may be more important for some children than others. The studies we reviewed indicated that children with a history of lax parenting or those with bold behavioral predispositions may be particularly sensitive to the experiences they have in classrooms and appear to benefit from extra time to practice behavioral regulation—as in complex play—and from teachers who are sensitive to their emotional signals and cues. Observational Studies of Classroom Factors In addition to teacher sensitivity and responsiveness, observational studies have demonstrated that teachers who provide organizational information about classroom rules, procedures, and activities have students with strong behavioral regulation (Pressley, Rankin, & Yokoi, 1996). Teacher organization may be especially important in the primary grades, when students are being socialized to classroom environments and learning how to regulate themselves in that context (Patrick, 1997; Wentzel, 1991). Cameron, Connor, and Morrison (2005) found that a pattern of classroom activity characterized by high amounts of teacher organization in the fall of first grade, which decreased as the yeat progressed, was associated with greater amounts of classroom-level independent work and word-reading skills in the spring (Cameron, Connor, Morrison, & Jewkes, 2008). Although direct measures of behavioral regulation were not gathered, these findings suggest that classroom organization at the beginning of the school year positively predicts growth of 212

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND

regulatory skills, and it may contribute to enhanced literacy achievement at the end ofthe year. However, children with low initial vocabulary levels had higher literacy scores when they were in classrooms practicing high organization in the fall and the winter, compared with children who had high vocabularies; these children achieved higher reading scores when they were in classrooms with high organization in the fall only (Cameron et al., 2008). This suggests that organization may be more important fot some children than others. A separate child-by-classroom interaction emetged in a study of chaos in preschool settings; boys but not girls in chaotic, disotganized settings exhibited lower levels of behavioral regulation than boys in well-organized settings (Wachs, Gurkas, & Kontos, 2004). Finally, in another study, stronger teacher organization interacted with child gender, such that boys in wellorganized first-grade classrooms made greater gains in mathematics, whereas girls made progress regardless ofthe level of organization in their classrooms (Ponitz, Rimm-Kaufman, Brock, & Nathanson, in press). These last preliminary findings, which hint that girls do better than boys regardless ofthe organization levels of their classrooms, suggest there is something to be learned by looking more closely at sources of gender-by-organization interactions. Future research is needed, but it is possible that boys are particularly susceptible to environmental disorganization or that boys contribute to a chaotic setting whereas girls remain less affected. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Evidence A second line of work using experiments and quasi-experiments complements naturalistic studies suggesting that schooling-related experiences can affect children's behavioral regulation (McCtea, Mueller, & Parrila, 1999). One recent study utilized the school cut-off technique, which separates developmental and schooling effects by studying children of similar age who, because of arbitrary school entry dates set by the state or district, enroll in different years in school. Burrage et al. (2008) used the Head-Toes-KneesShoulders Task (HTKS) as a measure of behavioral regulation and a separate working memory task, with prekindergarten and kindergarten children who were on average 2 months apart in chronological age. They found distinct schooling effects, such that working memory improved with both prekindergarten and kindergarten attendance. In conttast, overall behavioral regulation showed a marginally significant effect for prekindergarten only. These findings indicate that growth in behavioral regulation may be influenced by schooling, and also document how working memory and overall behavioral regulation may be differentially shaped by schooling influences (Miyake et al., 2000). Additional data confirm that regulatory skills can be improved through training in both laboratory and school-based settings (Klingberg, Femell, & Olesen, 2005). Evidence also suggests that attention can be trained in early childhood and that, after training, changes occur in SELF-REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

213

the underlying neurological networks responsible for attention (Rueda, Rothbart, McCandliss, Saccomanno, & Posner, 2005). The extent to which skills taught in the laboratory transfer to realworld settings has been less clear, but recent efforts to develop classroombased interventions are encouraging. In a quasi-experiment, Rimm-Kaufman and colleagues measured the effects of the Responsive Classroom Approach (RC; Elliot, 1995), which is a teacher intervention aimed at creating a sense of community within the classroom, establishing and maintaining rules and consequences, enhancing student independence, and minimizing problem behaviors. Students in RC settings exhibited better social skills, decreased problem behaviors, and higher academic performance compared with participants in control classrooms (Rimm-Kaufman & Chiu, 2007). There is evidence that the more students are exposed to RC practices within a school year and over multiple years, the more their behavior benefits (RimmKaufman, Fan, Chiu, & You, 2007). In a recent true experiment, researchers evaluated a Vygotskian, classroom-based curriculum called Tools ofthe Mind, which is intended to enhance children's preschool behavioral regulation through classroom activities (e.g., buddy reading requiring children to take turns; Diamond, Bamett, Thomas, & Munro, 2007). Children in the Tools of the Mind classrooms for 1 or 2 years scored higher on behavioral regulation than did childten with no program experience, and participation in the curriculum predicted better academic performance. Together, such studies have supported the view that behavioral regulation skills are amenable to school experiences; identifying the experiences and dosage required to see results are important next steps.

RISK FACTORS Despite this promising work, many children remain at a critical disadvantage when it comes to learning the regulatory skills they need in school. In the United States, children experiencing risk because of socioeconomic disadvantage, family background, or neighborhood violence have poorer selfregulation and academic achievement than those not experiencing such risks (Fantuzzo et al., 2005; Howse, Lange, et al., 2003; McClelland et al., 2000; Wanless, Sektnan, & McClelland, 2007). For example, children from disadvantaged backgrounds have been shown to be less able to regulate their attention in goal-directed tasks than their more advantaged peers (Howse, Lange, et al., 2003). Another study found that disadvantaged Spanish-speaking children had significantly poorer behavioral regulation (assessed with the Spanish version of the HTT) in preschool and kindergarten than English-speaking participants had (Wanless et al., 2007). Although preliminary, these results suggest that low-income Spanish-speaking children may be at risk of developing poor behavioral regulation prior to school entry. 214

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND

Research suggests how stressful early environments may shape particular patterns of brain activation and behavior (Shonkoff & Phillips, 2000). Stressful situations require constant attention to and maintenance of intense emotional information, leaving little opportunity for the intellectual exploration and learning that a stimuli-rich environment affords (Baumeister, Zell, & Tice, 2007). Examples of early stressors associated with poor developmental outcomes include severe stimulus deprivation; inconsistent or volatile parenting; frequent moves or change in caregivers; intense and frequent violence, abuse, or neglect; and membership in an underrepresented, historically disadvantaged ethnic minority group (Morales & Guerra, 2006). Recently, being male has also surfaced as a potential tisk factor for poor self-regulation, as survey data have documented the relatively large numbers of boys diagnosed with behavioral maladies such as attention-deficit/ hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and conduct disorder (e.g., Barkley, 2000; Clark, Prior, & Kinsella, 2002). New evidence placing boys at an educational disadvantage contrasts with past findings that classrooms and schools favored male students (Fergusson, Lloyd, & Horwood, 1991). For example, Matthews, Ponitz, and Morrison (in press) found that kindergarten boys scored significantly lower on self-regulation, measured objectively (by HTKS) as well as by teacher report in both fall and spring of the school year. Entwisle, Alexander, and Olson (2007) posited that although today's model student is perceived as female (e.g., studious, conscientious, compliant), more educated families are likely to support academic behaviors in both their male and female children. Indeed, among middle-class families, boys typically do as well as or bettet than girls on academic achievement measures (Entwisle et al., 2007). Poor families, however, are more likely to endorse and support stereotypes of boys as active and aggressive and girls as quiet and well-behaved, possibly giving girls overall an advantage in classroom settings. Thus, parents as well as teachers and students themselves may contribute to socializing poorly regulated behaviors in male students from socioeconomically disadvantaged backgrounds. Research by Duckworth and Seligman (2006) also shows that throughout the school years, girls demonstrate stronger selfdiscipline (e.g., spending more time doing homework) than boys do. We do not yet understand how the beliefs and practices of preschool elementary teachers, who are predominantly female and of majority ethnic status, may translate into variation in classroom experiences of male students, or children in general of different backgrounds. Researchers have suggested that the priorities of teachers who are Caucasian and from middle- to upper-middle socioeconomic backgrounds may not match the priorities and characteristics of socioeconomically disadvantaged students (Delpit, 1993, 1995). Moreover, Rimm-Kaufman et al. (2000) showed that teachers' assessments of the number of children experiencing difficulty with aspects of behaviotal regulation (e.g., following directions) increase when the responders are nonminority teachers in classrooms with a high proportion of minority SELF-REG ULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

215

children. These findings have encouraged us to take a complex view of the origins of poor self-regulation in many children, considering individual as well as environmental sources of the problem as well as possible solutions.

SOLVING THE PROBLEM: IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH AND PRACTICE The foregoing discussion documented multiple child and family contributors to the development of behavioral regulation while also strengthening the claim that behavioral regulation is amenable to experience. Yet clearly children and behavioral regulation do not develop in a vacuum, and some young students are at risk of developing ineffective ways of regulating their emotional reactions and directing their attention and behavior. On the basis of current findings, we propose three suggestions for future scientific and practical endeavors to promote behavioral regulation in the eatly school years. First, specifying aspects of behavioral regulation that are particularly strong predictors of academic success is critical; a simultaneous goal must be to develop effective measures of these skills. One recent study found that after early mathematics achievement, preschool levels of attention were the strongest predictors of mathematics and reading achievement measured up to 9 years later (Duncan et al., 2007), leading some to suggest that educators should work to promote mathematics achievement in young children. However, achievement tests were given directly, whereas most attention measures relied on teacher or parent report. Developing sensitive, predictive, and longitudinally valid measures of behavioral regulation and related skills can help illuminate this issue. Until then, we will lack precise information on how behavioral regulation and achievement truly relate, and we will chase the "chicken or the egg" question of which skill (achievement or behavioral regulation) deserves our focus and funding. Second, further research is needed to examine how child factors and classroom contexts interact. Our interest in such research is based on several accumulating studies indicating that social boldness or wariness, impulsivity, or gender—to name a few examples—interact with classroom factors to predict behavioral regulation (Ponitz et al., in press; Rimm-Kaufman et al., 2002; Wachs et al., 2004). Although still considered preliminary, research has indicated that boys in general and any children entering classrooms with poor behavioral regulation have more difficulty functioning adaptively, compared with girls in general and children who can better control their attention and behavior. A third, related implication is that some children may need to be explicitly taught the behavioral regulation skills expected in the classroom and have the opportunity to practice them. Observational evidence, as well as experimental evidence, has provided the basis for this claim, indicating positive relations among certain experiences and children's development of be216

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND

havioral regulation (Burrage et al., 2008; Cameron et al., 2005; Diamond et al., 2007; Rueda, Rothbart, et al., 2005). Spending time orienting children about the purposes of learning activities and offering information about how to complete tasks may help students behaviorally self-regulate and plan their future actions. Diamond's work (e.g., Diamond et al., 2007) also emphasizes the importance of giving children time to practice their attention, working memory, and inhibitory control skills. Although fairly new, the impottance of strong teacher organization and behavioral regulation can be seen in the vast parenting literature documenting the regulatory benefit for children when their parents provide consistent, clear expectations about behavior and support their independence (Grolnick & Farkas, 2002). Moreover, research indicates that incorporating time to practice regulating need not detract from the other priorities of preschool. Children can benefit from practicing behavioral regulation in both whole-group and small-group settings, and activities can be built into a variety of curricula activities in developmentally appropriate ways (Stipek et al., 1998). Promoting behavioral regulation in the classroom seems especially relevant given the mandates of the No Child Left Behind Act, which requires increased classroom time spent in instructional content earlier in children's school lives than in the past (Stipek, 2006). Although increasing the quantity and quality of instruction in content areas is important, the degree to which children can benefit from learning activities depends largely on their ability to respond to challenging and complex classroom settings in a regulated, deliberate manner.

CONCLUSION In this chapter, we have identified four emerging themes of research on behavioral regulation. First, behavioral regulation and its underlying cognitive components are strongly linked to academic achievement. Second, compared with emotional regulation, children's behavioral regulation is most predictive of their achievement. This may be due to the importance of the attentional focusing aspects of behavioral regulation for learning to regulate emotional reactivity and behavior, as well as to direct relations among behavioral regulation skills and academic tasks. Third, in the parenting and emerging educational literature, environments and interactions that provide structure, organization, and opportunities fot children to practice regulating are associated with positive behavioral regulation in the early school years. Fourth, children whose disruptive behavior does not allow them to participate adaptively in school are at significantly greater risk of school failure than are children who successfully regulate themselves. Success early in school, which is founded on children's ability to regulate their overt behavior in practical tasks like remembering instructions and SELF-REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

217

working independently, is highly predictive of later academic and social functioning (McClelland et al., 2006; Vitaro et al., 2005). A confluence of factors—including individual, parenting, and teacher characteristics—clearly work together to contribute to children's behavioral regulation. A n overarching implication from these findings is that factors such as child attributes, as well as the classroom context, must be considered as possible influences on developing behavioral regulation skills and intervention efforts. However, directly teaching classroom expectations and giving all children time to practice their behavioral regulation skills will help ensure that children who enter formal schooling without strong self-regulation have the opportunity to hone this critical skill set.

REFERENCES Alexander, K. L., Entwisle, D. R., & Dauber, S. L. (1993). First-grade classroom behavior: Its short- and long-term consequences for school performance. Child Development, 64, 801-814. Barkley, R. A. (2000). Genetics of childhood disorders: XVII. ADHD, Part 1: The executive functions and ADHD. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 39, 1064-1068. Baumeister, R. F., Zell, A. L., & Tice, D. M. (2007). How emotions facilitate and impair self-regulation. In J. J. Gross (Ed.), Handbook of emotion regulation (pp. 408-426). New York, NY: Guilford Press. Belsky, J., Friedman, S. L., & Hsieh, K.-H. (2001). Testing a core emotion-regulation prediction: Does early attentional persistence moderate the effect of infant negative emotionality on later development? Child Development, 72, 123-133. Blair, C. (2002). School readiness: Integrating cognition and emotion in a neurobiological conceptualization of children's functioning at school entry. American Psychologist, 57, 111-127. Blair, C. (2003). Behavioral inhibition and behavioral activation in young children: Relations with self-regulation and adaptation to preschool in children attending Head Start. Developmental Psychobiology, 42, 301-311. Blair, C , & Razza, R. P. (2007). Relating effortful control, executive function, and false belief understanding to emerging math and literacy ability in kindergarten. Child Development, 78, 647-663. Bull, R., Espy, K. A., & Senn, T. E. (2004). A comparison of performance on the Towers of London and Hanoi in young children. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 743-754. Burrage, M., Ponitz, C. C , McCready, E. A., Shah, P. R., Sims, B. C , Jewkes, A. M., et al. (2008). Age and schooling-related effects on executive functions in young children: A natural experiment. Child Neuropsychology, 1-15. Calkins, S. D. (2004). Early attachment processes and the development of emotional self-regulation. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of 218

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND

self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (pp. 324-339). New York: Guilford Press. Calkins, S. D. (2007). The emergence of self-regulation: Biological and behavioral control mechanisms supporting toddler competencies. In C. A. Brownell & C. B. Kopp (Eds.), Socioemotional development in the toddler years: Transitions and transformations (pp. 261-284). New York: Guilford Press. Calkins, S. D., Graziano, P. A., & Keane, S. P. (2007). Cardiac vagal regulation differentiates among children at risk for behavior problems. Biological Psychology, 74, 144-153. Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., & Monison, F. J. (2005). Effects of variation in teacher organization on classroom functioning. Journal of School Psychology, 43, 61-85. Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., Morrison, F. J., & Jewkes, A. M. (2008). Effects of classroom organization on letter-word reading in first grade. Journal of School Psychology, 46, 173-192. Clark, C , Prior, M., &. Kinsella, G (2002). The relationship between executive function abilities, adaptive behaviour, and academic achievement in children with externalising behaviour problems. Journal of Child Psychology &. Psychiatry & Allied Disciplines, 43, 785-796. Delpit, L. D. (1993). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children. In L. Weis & M. Fine (Eds.), Beyond silenced voices: Class, race, and gender in United States schools (pp. 119-139). Albany: State University of New York Press. Delpit, L. D. (1995). Other people's children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: New York Press. De Wolff, M., & van Ijzendoom, M. H. (1997). Sensitivity and attachment: A metaanalysis on parental antecedents of infant attachment. Child Development, 68, 571-591. Diamond, A., Bamett, W. S., Thomas, J., & Munro, S. (2007, November 30). Preschool program improves cognitive control. Science, 318, 1387-1388. Diamond, A. (2000). Close intenelation of motor development and cognitive development and ofthe cerebellum and prefrontal cortex. Child Development, 71, 44-56. Duckworth, A. L., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2006). Self-discipline gives girls the edge: Gender in self-discipline, grades, and achievement test scores. Journal of Educational Psychobgy, 98, 198-208. Duncan, G. J., Dowsett, C. J., Claessens, A., Magnuson, K., Huston, A. C , Klebanov, P., et al. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1428-1446. Eisenberg, N., Sadovsky, A., Spinrad, T. L., Fabes, R. A., Losoya, S. H , Valiente, C , et al. (2005). The relations of problem behavior status to children's negative emotionality, effortful control, and impulsivity: Concurrent relations and prediction of change. Developmental Psychology, 41, 193-211. SELF-REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

219

Eisenberg, N., Smith, C. L, Sadovsky, A., & Spinrad, T. L. (2004). Effortful control: Relations with emotion regulation, adjustment, and socialization in childhood. In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (pp. 259-282). New York: Guilford Press. Eisenberg, N., & Spinrad, T. L. (2004). Emotion-related regulation: Sharpening the definition. Child Development, 75, 334-339. Elias, C. L, & Berk, L. E. (2002). Self-regulation in young children: Is there a role for sociodramatic play? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 216-238. Elliot, S. N. (1995). The Responsive Classroom approach: Its effectiveness and acceptability (Final evaluation report). Washington, DC: Center for Systemic Educational Change, District of Columbia Public Schools. Entwisle, D. R, Alexander, K. L, & Olson, L. S. (2007). Early schooling: The handicap of being poor and male. Sociology of Education, 80, 114-138. Fantuzzo, J. W., Rouse, H. L, McDermott, P. A., Sekino, Y., Childs, S., & Weiss, A. (2005). Early childhood experiences and kindergarten success: A populationbased study of a large urban setting. School Psychology Review, 34, 571-588. Fergusson, D. M., Lloyd, M., & Horwood, L. J. (1991). Teacher evaluations of the performance of boys and girls. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 26, 155-163. Graziano, P. A., Reavis, R. D., Keane, S. P., & Calkins, S. D. (2006). The role of emotion regulation in children's early academic success. Journal of School Psychology, 45, 3-19. Gilliam, W. S., & Shahar, G. (2006). Preschool and child care expulsion and suspension: Rates and predictors in one state. Infants and Young Children, 19, 228245. Golden, C. J. (1984). Luria-Nebraska Neuropsychological Battery: Children's Revision. Los Angeles: Western Psychological Services. Griffin, J. (Chair). (2008, June). Measurement in early childhood consortium. Poster presented at the Ninth Annual Head Start National Research Conference, Washington, DC. Grolnick, W. S., & Farkas, M. (2002). Parenting and the development of children's self-regulation. In M. H. Bomstein (Ed.), Handbook of parenting: Vol. 5. Practical issues in parenting (2nd ed., pp. 89-110). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum. Henderson, H. A., & Fox, N. A. (1998). Inhibited and uninhibited children: Challenges in school settings. School Psychology Revieiv, 27, 492-505. Howse, R. B., Calkins, S. D., Anastopoulos, A. D., Keane, S. P., & Shelton, T. L. (2003). Regulatory contributors to children's kindergarten achievement. Early Education & Devebpment, 14, 101-119. Howse, R. B., Lange, G , Farran, D. C , & Boyles, C. D. (2003). Motivation and selfregulation as predictors of achievement in economically disadvantaged young children. Journal of Experimental Education, 71, 151-174Klingberg, T , Femell, E., & Olesen, P. J. (2005). Computerized training of working memory in children with ADHD—A randomized, controlled trial. Journal ofthe American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, 44, 177-186. 220

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND

Kochanska, G , & Knaack, A. (2003). Effortful control as a personality characteristic of young children: Antecedents, correlates, and consequences. Journal of Personality, 71,1087-1112. Kochanska, G , Murray, K. T , & Harlan, E. T. (2000). Effortful control in early childhood: Continuity and change, antecedents, and implications for social development. Developmental Psychology, 36, 220-232. Kopp, C. B. (1982). Antecedents of self-regulation: A developmental perspective. Developmental Psychobgy, 18,199-214. Lan, X., & Morrison, F. J. (2008, July). Inter-conelations among components of behavioral regulation and their relationship with academic outcomes in China. In M. M. McClelland & S. Wanless (Chairs), Touching your toes in four cultures: Devebping a new measure of behavioral regulation for young children. Symposium conducted at the Biennial Meeting ofthe International Society for the Study of Behavioural Development, Wurzburg, Germany. Lewis, M. D., & Todd, R. M. (2007). The self-regulating brain: Cortical-subcortical feedback and the development of intelligent action. Cognitive Development, 22, 406-430. Matthews, J. S., Ponitz, C. C , & Morrison, F. J. (in press). Early gender differences in self-regulation and academic achievement. Journal of Educational Psychobgy. Mazzocco, M. M. M., & Kover, S. T. (2007). A longitudinal assessment of executive function skills and their association with math performance. Child Neuropsychobgy, 13, 18-45. McClelland, M. M., Acock, A. C , & Morrison, F. J. (2006). The impact of kindergarten learning-related skills on academic trajectories at the end of elementary school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21, 471-490. McClelland, M. M., Cameron, C. E., Connor, C. M., Farris, C. L., Jewkes, A. M., & Morrison, F. J. (2007). Links between behavioral regulation and preschoolers' literacy, vocabulary, and math skills. Developmental Psychobgy, 43, 947-959. McClelland, M. M., Cameron, C. E., Wanless, S. B., & Murray, A. (2007). Executive function, self-regulation, and social-emotional competence: Links to school readiness. In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Contemporary perspectives on research in social learning in early childhood education, (pp. 83-107). Charlotte, NC: Information Age. McClelland, M. M., Morrison, F. J., & Holmes, D. L. (2000). Children at risk for early academic problems: The role of learning-related social skills. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 307-329. McCrea, S. M., Mueller, J. H , & Parrila, R. K. (1999). Quantitative analyses of schooling effects on executive function in young children. Child Neuropsychology, 5, 242-250. Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., & Howerter, A. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex "frontal lobe" tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49-100.

SELF-REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

221

Morales, J. R., & Guerra, N. G. (2006). Effects of multiple context and cumulative stress on urban children's adjustment in elementary school. Child Devebpment, 77, 907-923. Monison, F. J., Bachman, H. J., & Connor, C. M. (2005). Improving literacy in America: Guidelines from research. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Muller, U., Dick, A. S., Gela, K, Overton, W. E, & Zelazo, P. D. (2006). The role of negative priming in preschoolers' flexible rule use on the Dimensional Change Card Sort task. Child Development, 77, 395-412. Nathanson, L., Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Brock, L. L. (in press). Kindergarten adjustment difficulty: The contribution of children's effortful control and parental control. Early Education & Devebpment. National Institute for Child Health and Human Development Early Child Care Research Network. (2003). Do children's attention processes mediate the link between family predictors and school readiness? Devebpmental Psychobgy, 39, 581-593. Patrick, H. (1997). Social self-regulation: Exploring the relations between children's social relationships, academic self-regulation, and school performance. Educational Psychologist, 32, 209-220. Ponitz, C. C , McClelland, M. M., Jewkes, A. M., Connor, C. M., Farris, C. L., & Morrison, F. J. (2008). Touch your toes! Developing a direct measure of behavioral regulation in early childhood. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 23,141158. Ponitz, C. C , McClelland, M. M., Matthews, J. S., & Morrison, F. J. (2009). A structured observation of behavioral self-regulation and its contribution to kindergarten outcomes. Developmental Psychology, 45, 605-619. Ponitz, C. G, Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Brock, L. L., & Nathanson, L. (in press). Early adjustment, gender differences, and classroom organizational climate in first grade. Elementary School Journal. Pressley, M., Rankin, J., & Yokoi, L. (1996). A survey of instructional practices of primary teachers nominated as effective in promoting literacy. Elementary School Journal, 96, 363-384. Raver, C. C. (2004). Placing emotional self-regulation in sociocultural and socioeconomic contexts. Child Devebpment, 75, 346-353. Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., & Chiu, Y.-J. I. (2007). Promoting social and academic competence in the classroom: An intervention study examining the contribution of the Responsive Classroom approach. Psychobgy in the Schools, 44, 397—413. Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Early, D. M., Cox, M. J., Saluja, G , Pianta, R. C , Bradley, R. H., et al. (2002). Early behavioral attributes and teachers' sensitivity as predictors of competent behavior in the kindergarten classroom. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychobgy, 23, 451-470. Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Fan, X., Chiu, Y.-J. I., & You, W. (2007). The contribution of the Responsive Classroom Approach on children's academic achievement: Results from a three year longitudinal study. Journal of School Psychobgy, 45, 401421. 222

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND

Rimm-Kaufman, S. E., Pianta, R. C , & Cox, M. J. (2000). Teachers' judgments of problems in the transition to kindergarten. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 15, 147-166. Rothbart, M. K, Posner, M. I., & Kieras, J. (2006). Temperament, attention, and the development of self-regulation. In K. McCartney & D. Phillips (Eds.), Blackivell handbook of early childhood development (pp. 338-357). Walden, MA: Blackwell. Rothbart, M. K, & Rueda, M. R. (2005). The development of effortful control. In U. Mayr, E. Awh, & S. W. Keele (Eds.), Devebping individuality in the human brain: A tribute to Michael I. Posner (pp. 167-188). Washington, DC US: American Psychological Association. Rueda, M. R., Posner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (2005). The development of executive attention: Contributions to the emergence of self-regulation. Devebpmental Neuropsychobgy, 28, 573-594. Rueda, M. R., Rothbart, M. K., McCandliss, B. D., Saccomanno, L., & Posner, M. I. (2005). Training, maturation, and genetic influences on the development of executive attention. Proceedings ofthe National Academy of Sciences, 102,1439114936. Schunk, D. H., & Zimmerman, B. J. (1997). Social origins of self-regulatory competence. Educational Psychologist, 32, 195-208. Shonkoff, J. P., & Phillips, D. A. (2000). From neurons to neighborhoods: The science of early childhood development. Washington, DC: National Academies Press. Stipek, D. J. (2006). No Child Left Behind comes to preschool. Elementary School Journal, 106,455^65. Stipek, D. J., Feiler, R., Byler, P., Ryan, R., Milbum, S., & Salmon, J. M. (1998). Good beginnings: What difference does the program make in preparing young children for school? Journal of Applied Devebpmental Psychobgy, 19, 41-66. Trentacosta, C. J., & Izard, C. E. (2007). Kindergarten children's emotion competence as a predictor of their academic competence in first grade. Emotion, 7, 77-88. Tudge, J. R. H , Odero, D. A., Hogan, D. M., & Etz, K. E. (2003). Relations between the everyday activities of preschoolers and their teachers' perceptions of their competence in the first years of school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 18, 42-64. Vitaro, F., Brendgen, M., Larose, S., & Trembaly, R. E. (2005). Kindergarten disruptive behaviors, protective factors, and educational achievement by early adulthood. Journal of Educational Psychobgy, 97, 617-629. Wachs, T. D., Gurkas, P., & Kontos, S. (2004). Predictors of preschool children's compliance behavior in early childhood classroom settings. Journal of Applied Devebpmental Psychobgy, 25, 439-457. Wanless, S. B., Sektnan, M., & McClelland, M. M. (2007, April). Growth in behavioral self-regulation during the transition to kindergarten for English- and Spanishspeaking children. Poster presented at the biennial meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Boston. SELF-REGULATION AND ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT

223

Waters, E., Weinfield, N. S., & Hamilton, C. E. (2000). The stability of attachment security from infancy to adolescence and early adulthood: General discussion. Child Devebpment, 71, 703-706. Wentzel, K. R. (1991). Social competence at school: Relation between social responsibility and academic achievement. Review; of Educational Research, 61, 124. Zelazo, P. D., Muller, U., Frye, D., & Marcovitch, S. (2003). The development of executive function in early childhood. Monographs ofthe Society for Research in Child Devebpment, 68. Zelazo, P. D., Muller, U., & Goswami, U. (2002). Executive function in typical and atypical development. In U. Goswami (Ed.), Blackwell handbook of childhood cognitive development (pp. 445-469). Maiden, MA: Blackwell.

224

MORRISON, PONITZ, AND McCLELLAND